DUST Search - Swarm Launcher 2.0

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Swarm Launcher 2.0

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Ulysses Knapse duna corp 727	Posted - 2013.12.14 09:17:00 - [1] - Quote Swarm Launcher needs some love, don't you agree? And as such, I propose a few changes! #1: Active Tracking Last I checked, Swarm Missiles had the nasty tendency of not actively tracking (that is, they didn't keep up with the movements of the vehicle) until they reached their target's original position. If this isn't the case anymore, my apologies, but if it is, this should probably change. Stupid smart missiles are still stupid missiles. They should actively track the target during their entire flight. #2: Faster Movement, Slower Tracking Swarm Missiles are ridiculously agile, easily capable of 90 degree turns, sometimes even sharper turns if you're lucky, so the Swarm Launcher is quite easy to use. They aren't very fast, though, allowing fast vehicles to avoid them simply by being fast. This is madness. I propose Swarm Missiles become faster, but track slower, so you have to put more effort into aiming them, but in exchange, vehicles have to put more effort into avoiding them. #3: Anti-Infantry Usage Swarm Launchers are the most limited weapons in Dust 514. I propose they gain the ability to lock-on to infantry. However! This won't come easy. Locking on to infantry would take far longer than locking on to vehicles, and they wouldn't be able to fly directly at a dropsuit, only at its general direction (unless you were very lucky, you would only ever deal splash damage). I'm not sure of the exact numbers for how long it takes to lock or how accurate the missiles are, but you get the gist of it. Also, with #2, you would still have to lead your target to some extent for the best results. You could also reduce the splash damage, which wouldn't hurt its main purpose much but it would reduce its effectiveness when used in this manner. #4: Buff It! The Swarm Launcher is kind of sad and pathetic right now, and it would still be even with these changes. In the end, the Swarm Launcher still needs a good ol' genuine buff. Increased direct damage, at least against HAVs, at the very least. Giving it back some (but not all) of its lost range would also be a good start. Humanity is the personification of change.
gt5544fghjj Intara Direct Action Caldari State 0	Posted - 2013.12.14 09:22:00 - [2] - Quote increase damage by 20 maybe, proto swarms REALLY hurt, especially when 2 people fire swarms
ALT2 acc The dyst0pian Corporation Zero-Day 24	Posted - 2013.12.14 09:23:00 - [3] - Quote gt5544fghjj wrote: increase damage by 20 maybe, proto swarms REALLY hurt, especially when 2 people fire swarms wrong character sorry people
ThePlayerkyle13 PlayerArmy Industries 23	Posted - 2013.12.14 12:02:00 - [4] - Quote Ulysses Knapse wrote: #3: Anti-Infantry Usage Swarm Launchers are the most limited weapons in Dust 514. I propose they gain the ability to lock-on to infantry. However! This won't come easy. Locking on to infantry would take far longer than locking on to vehicles, and they wouldn't be able to fly directly at a dropsuit, only at its general direction (unless you were very lucky, you would only ever deal splash damage). I'm not sure of the exact numbers for how long it takes to lock or how accurate the missiles are, but you get the gist of it. Also, with #2, you would still have to lead your target to some extent for the best results. You could also reduce the splash damage, which wouldn't hurt its main purpose much but it would reduce its effectiveness when used in this manner. Instead of locking on to infantry what about switching the Launcher to Manual Fire wheres thiers no lock on, cos i'm pretty sure that killing Infantry with a lock on weapon ecpecially one thats designed for Anti-Vehciles uses would be annoying & unavoidable...
DAMIOS82 ACME SPECIAL FORCES 70	Posted - 2013.12.14 12:22:00 - [5] - Quote perhaps it needs some tweaks, but not a buff. Instead other variety's of av should be introduced, like a heavy version of the swarmer. Or a single more heavier payload, instead of the swarm version. So swarm is multiple rockets with less damage, while the single rocket one has more damage. This would be the better solution.
Krom Ganesh Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 923	Posted - 2013.12.14 13:43:00 - [6] - Quote I think the swarm is fine without anti-infantry capabilities. It offers long range (or supposed to...) AV capabilities when compared with the other AV-ish weapons (PLC, Breach MD, Flaylock, and AV grenades). I'd like for the swarms to * Fly faster * Increased lock-on range (~250?) * Decrease the missiles ability to turn * and then walk up the damage through hotfixes until it is in a comfortable place If the swarms were faster, I don't think we would need to change the tracking as it would be beneficial. By waiting to actively track the target, swarms are able to set up a course that moves in the same vector as the target making it much easier to hit said target (also allows for easier hits to the back of a tank). If they did actively track, they could end up reaching the target at a perpendicular angle to target's movements, making them easy to dodge. The decreased ability for swarms to turn will be its main balancing factor. Swarms should be able to deal a good amount of damage, but a skilled pilot aware of the direction the swarms are coming from should be able to dodge them. !
Sarducar Kahn xCosmic Voidx Partners of Industrial Service and Salvage 158	Posted - 2013.12.14 13:47:00 - [7] - Quote I want 160 ish dmg per missile but mlt fires 6 pro 8 this removes the stupid 50% damage increase form basic to Proto and brings it more in line with other weapons. Don't drink 'n drive kids. (That's my job)
Ulysses Knapse duna corp 729	Posted - 2013.12.14 18:43:00 - [8] - Quote ThePlayerkyle13 wrote: Ulysses Knapse wrote: #3: Anti-Infantry Usage Swarm Launchers are the most limited weapons in Dust 514. I propose they gain the ability to lock-on to infantry. However! This won't come easy. Locking on to infantry would take far longer than locking on to vehicles, and they wouldn't be able to fly directly at a dropsuit, only at its general direction (unless you were very lucky, you would only ever deal splash damage). I'm not sure of the exact numbers for how long it takes to lock or how accurate the missiles are, but you get the gist of it. Also, with #2, you would still have to lead your target to some extent for the best results. You could also reduce the splash damage, which wouldn't hurt its main purpose much but it would reduce its effectiveness when used in this manner. Instead of locking on to infantry what about switching the Launcher to Manual Fire wheres thiers no lock on, cos i'm pretty sure that killing Infantry with a lock on weapon ecpecially one thats designed for Anti-Vehciles uses would be annoying & unavoidable... Actually, it would be worse if it had manual fire. Firing swarms of missiles with no time delay? Terrible idea. Also, guided missiles don't necessarily have to have 100% hit rate. Humanity is the personification of change.
Stile451 Red Star. EoN. 295	Posted - 2013.12.14 23:59:00 - [9] - Quote Splash damage is negligable. You will do far more damage with a sidearm. If dummy firing is brought back and splash was increased then we're back to where swarms were when they first came out(absolutely ridiculous - instakilled nearly every suit).
Ulysses Knapse duna corp 735	Posted - 2013.12.15 00:11:00 - [10] - Quote Stile451 wrote: Splash damage is negligable. You will do far more damage with a sidearm. If dummy firing is brought back and splash was increased then we're back to where swarms were when they first came out(absolutely ridiculous - instakilled nearly every suit). Solution = don't give them dumbfire. Humanity is the personification of change.

Sgt Buttscratch 1137	Posted - 2013.12.15 00:13:00 - [11] - Quote Swarmers are fine, learn how to fight the new tanks. I stick my weiner in two buns and and then give it the gas Sour cream from my spleen into Levi jeans
Ulysses Knapse duna corp 735	Posted - 2013.12.15 00:16:00 - [12] - Quote Sgt Buttscratch wrote: Swarmers are fine, learn how to fight the new tanks. Hahahahaha... No, that's not the problem. Swarm Launchers have needed work since they first came out. 1.7 just highlights the issues that already existed. Humanity is the personification of change.
Stile451 Red Star. EoN. 295	Posted - 2013.12.15 19:13:00 - [13] - Quote 1. I like active tracking(it should already be in the game tbh). Vehicle users should like it as well as they're constantly complaining about swarms that turn corners. 2. Faster movement and slower tracking isn't really needed with the current lock on range. 3. There should be no lock on for infantry. They could make the secondary fire mode a laser guided mode(swarms should require a minimum travel distance before arming when used in this mode). 4. The swarm doesn't need much of a buff, just a slight lock on range increase(25m would be fine).
Ulysses Knapse Knapse and Co. Mercenary Firm 817	Posted - 2013.12.20 05:24:00 - [14] - Quote Bump. What's the difference between an immobile Minmatar ship and a pile of garbage? The pile of garbage looks nicer.
deepfried salad gilliam Sanguine Knights 370	Posted - 2014.01.07 01:43:00 - [15] - Quote tie lockon time to scan signature and add ability to lose lock mid flight and it would be an av weapon that stands a chance in long range engagements with infantry Proud Christian one of the most essential parts of eve is left out of dust: freedom, exploration, open-world gameplay.
Goric Rumis Dead Six Initiative Lokun Listamenn 280	Posted - 2014.01.07 04:48:00 - [16] - Quote Take out the anti-infantry usage (it's too easy for it to get bad) and it seems to me you're making pretty uncontroversial points. The first two have support from both vehicle and swarm users as far as I've seen. There's another thread somewhere around here making a point about how the tiers need to be flattened as well. Standard to advanced is a 25% damage increase, and advanced to proto is a 20% damage increase, which is a much steeper incline than any other class of weapon. If the standard has higher damage per missile (but lower total damage) than proto, the damage profile of the tiers will even out a little more and be more predictable. For example, standard is 280 per missile x 4 missiles = 1120 total damage, advanced is 260 per missile x 5 missiles = 1280 total damage, proto is 240 per missile x 6 missiles = 1440 total damage. Those numbers would bring down the incline to more reasonable 14% and 12.5% increases tier-over-tier. The Tank Balancing Factor No One Is Discussing
bogeyman m Learning Coalition College 8	Posted - 2014.01.15 08:10:00 - [17] - Quote - faster missiles - distance related lock times (<50m=0.5sec, >250m=1.75sec) - longer lock distances; should be similar to tanks and turrets (Std=250, Adv=275, Pro=300) - flatter Std/Adv/Pro damage slope by (a) removing proficiency skill (b) resetting damage to pre 1.7 levels - add single-shot dumb fire option, LoS only, works on infantry also, mid-long range only, slow RoF (like a poor man's forge gun)
Jack Boost Zarena Family 300	Posted - 2014.01.15 10:14:00 - [18] - Quote Currently status in Swarm-wars Once upon the time I fight with proto swarm vs good tanker at hils. End? He was pissed enough after 10min of fight to ... jump out of tank and kill me with 'crowbar'. (3 sec of ending with gun) Stats: 4 times he run out and back 1 tank down I died 4 times (not only from tank, but dehydration too ;)) Toons of dmg from my side to vain Almost 'ZERO' wp and lots of isk down. Conclusion: - give AV fighters more wp - give back range on swarm - Look at my post to change 'dmg modifiers dropsuit modules' to infantry module and AV-module (with changed stats)
REDWALL COMMANDER The Phoenix Federation 0	Posted - 2014.01.15 10:43:00 - [19] - Quote Sgt Buttscratch wrote: Swarmers are fine, learn how to fight the new tanks. Tanker cry baby stop crying you cry baby needing OP tank to get kills
Auris Lionesse SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 55	Posted - 2014.01.15 11:33:00 - [20] - Quote I said this elsewhere but Ccp needs to start with militia swarm launchers. Until frontline anti-armor can can kill a militia tank by itself balance won't be achieved for sl as an av weapon.

Alam Storm Third Rock From The Sun INTERGALACTIC WARPIGS 59	Posted - 2014.01.15 11:39:00 - [21] - Quote Quote: #3: Anti-Infantry Usage Swarm Launchers are the most limited weapons in Dust 514. I propose they gain the ability to lock-on to infantry. However! This won't come easy. Locking on to infantry would take somewhat longer than locking on to vehicles, and they wouldn't be able to fly directly at a dropsuit, only at its general direction (unless you were lucky, you would usually only deal splash damage). I'm not sure of the exact numbers for how long it takes to lock or how accurate the missiles are, but you get the gist of it. Also, with #2, you would still have to lead your target to some extent for the best results. stupid idea swarm launchers are not mean for infantry if they ended up as an anti infantry weapon they will be abused and people will get stupid deaths from over 150 metres away and not even see it coming
Ulysses Knapse Knapse and Co. Mercenary Firm 1077	Posted - 2014.01.15 17:17:00 - [22] - Quote Alam Storm wrote: Quote: #3: Anti-Infantry Usage Swarm Launchers are the most limited weapons in Dust 514. I propose they gain the ability to lock-on to infantry. However! This won't come easy. Locking on to infantry would take somewhat longer than locking on to vehicles, and they wouldn't be able to fly directly at a dropsuit, only at its general direction (unless you were lucky, you would usually only deal splash damage). I'm not sure of the exact numbers for how long it takes to lock or how accurate the missiles are, but you get the gist of it. Also, with #2, you would still have to lead your target to some extent for the best results. stupid idea swarm launchers are not mean for infantry if they ended up as an anti infantry weapon they will be abused and people will get stupid deaths from over 150 metres away and not even see it coming Forge Guns. Your argument is invalid. What's the difference between an immobile Minmatar ship and a pile of garbage? The pile of garbage is more lethal.
Alam Storm Third Rock From The Sun INTERGALACTIC WARPIGS 59	Posted - 2014.01.15 18:01:00 - [23] - Quote Ulysses Knapse wrote: Alam Storm wrote: Quote: #3: Anti-Infantry Usage Swarm Launchers are the most limited weapons in Dust 514. I propose they gain the ability to lock-on to infantry. However! This won't come easy. Locking on to infantry would take somewhat longer than locking on to vehicles, and they wouldn't be able to fly directly at a dropsuit, only at its general direction (unless you were lucky, you would usually only deal splash damage). I'm not sure of the exact numbers for how long it takes to lock or how accurate the missiles are, but you get the gist of it. Also, with #2, you would still have to lead your target to some extent for the best results. stupid idea swarm launchers are not mean for infantry if they ended up as an anti infantry weapon they will be abused and people will get stupid deaths from over 150 metres away and not even see it coming Forge Guns. Your argument is invalid. it is valid forge guns you can dodge swarms you can let them loose and sit back and watch them chase the infantry around the map they would end up being a buffed up version of the flaylock pistols when they were good
Ulysses Knapse Knapse and Co. Mercenary Firm 1077	Posted - 2014.01.16 02:47:00 - [24] - Quote Alam Storm wrote: Ulysses Knapse wrote: Alam Storm wrote: Quote: #3: Anti-Infantry Usage Swarm Launchers are the most limited weapons in Dust 514. I propose they gain the ability to lock-on to infantry. However! This won't come easy. Locking on to infantry would take somewhat longer than locking on to vehicles, and they wouldn't be able to fly directly at a dropsuit, only at its general direction (unless you were lucky, you would usually only deal splash damage). I'm not sure of the exact numbers for how long it takes to lock or how accurate the missiles are, but you get the gist of it. Also, with #2, you would still have to lead your target to some extent for the best results. stupid idea swarm launchers are not mean for infantry if they ended up as an anti infantry weapon they will be abused and people will get stupid deaths from over 150 metres away and not even see it coming Forge Guns. Your argument is invalid. it is valid forge guns you can dodge swarms you can let them loose and sit back and watch them chase the infantry around the map they would end up being a buffed up version of the flaylock pistols when they were good It's like you didn't even pay attention to my thread. You just saw the word "anti-infantry" and started pouting like a child who doesn't want to listen to someone else's thoughts. What's the difference between an immobile Minmatar ship and a pile of garbage? The pile of garbage is more lethal.
Alam Storm Third Rock From The Sun INTERGALACTIC WARPIGS 60	Posted - 2014.01.16 09:54:00 - [25] - Quote Ulysses Knapse wrote: Alam Storm wrote: Ulysses Knapse wrote: Alam Storm wrote: Quote: #3: Anti-Infantry Usage Swarm Launchers are the most limited weapons in Dust 514. I propose they gain the ability to lock-on to infantry. However! This won't come easy. Locking on to infantry would take somewhat longer than locking on to vehicles, and they wouldn't be able to fly directly at a dropsuit, only at its general direction (unless you were lucky, you would usually only deal splash damage). I'm not sure of the exact numbers for how long it takes to lock or how accurate the missiles are, but you get the gist of it. Also, with #2, you would still have to lead your target to some extent for the best results. stupid idea swarm launchers are not mean for infantry if they ended up as an anti infantry weapon they will be abused and people will get stupid deaths from over 150 metres away and not even see it coming Forge Guns. Your argument is invalid. it is valid forge guns you can dodge swarms you can let them loose and sit back and watch them chase the infantry around the map they would end up being a buffed up version of the flaylock pistols when they were good It's like you didn't even pay attention to my thread. You just saw the word "anti-infantry" and started pouting like a child who doesn't want to listen to someone else's thoughts. yes i read it you want missiles to go in the general direction of the target around it or atleast near by but given past experiance what makes you think CCP will get it right. to them around or near the target is bang on the target making it OP or 100 metres away from it making it useless this idea is stupid and not what we need added to an already unbalanced weapon selection
bogeyman m Learning Coalition College 16	Posted - 2014.01.16 12:13:00 - [26] - Quote Alam Storm wrote: Quote: #3: Anti-Infantry Usage Swarm Launchers are the most limited weapons in Dust 514. I propose they gain the ability to lock-on to infantry. However! This won't come easy. Locking on to infantry would take somewhat longer than locking on to vehicles, and they wouldn't be able to fly directly at a dropsuit, only at its general direction (unless you were lucky, you would usually only deal splash damage). I'm not sure of the exact numbers for how long it takes to lock or how accurate the missiles are, but you get the gist of it. Also, with #2, you would still have to lead your target to some extent for the best results. stupid idea swarm launchers are not mean for infantry if they ended up as an anti infantry weapon they will be abused and people will get stupid deaths from over 150 metres away and not even see it coming You mean like a canon on an Incubus?
bogeyman m Learning Coalition College 16	Posted - 2014.01.16 12:32:00 - [27] - Quote I was able to get close to an Incubus today with my Advanced Swarm Launcher (and one Enhanced Damage Mod) - the pilot must have been distracted. I got off one whole clip (three volleys, 15 missiles, 3,465 damage) before he even moved. I maybe cleared half his shields (with zero armour damage). Before my 3 second reload plus 1.4 second target-lock cycle completed, he got off three (3) cannon shots. (He could also have easily warped to the other side of the map within those 4.4 seconds, but I clearly wasn't a threat to him.) My bunny hopping avoided the first two shots but the third hit with enough damage to kill me twice over. I caught a quick local spawn and found the Incubus in the same place - he had already returned to full shield.
BAD FURRY SVER True Blood Public Disorder. 289	Posted - 2014.01.16 13:20:00 - [28] - Quote How bout keep SL,s how they are and re add in a slower dum fire that can kill drop-suits like it uses to do only now not so OP HAY Look CCP i fixed SL,s ! Yes i am a Undead Hell Wolf ... nice to meat you!
Ghermard-ol Dizeriois Maphia Clan Corporation 79	Posted - 2014.01.16 13:26:00 - [29] - Quote I proposed to restore Dumb-Fire some ago, and there I was told such possibility existed in old DUST, but it was removed. Missiles are slow, none can deny this. The 175.00 meters of acquiring range isn't that good either, especially if you consider dropships which can easily climb high enough to be too far. If you are an hacker, a cheater o a glitcher, you deserve death. In real life.
Ulysses Knapse Knapse and Co. Mercenary Firm 1081	Posted - 2014.01.18 00:45:00 - [30] - Quote Alam Storm wrote: yes i read it you want missiles to go in the general direction of the target around it or atleast near by but given past experiance what makes you think CCP will get it right. to them around or near the target is bang on the target making it OP or 100 metres away from it making it useless So basically, your opposition for the idea comes from your belief that CCP will mess it up? That's #@!$ing stupid. What's the difference between an immobile Minmatar ship and a pile of garbage? The pile of garbage is more lethal.

Aizen Intiki Hell's Gate Inc League of Infamy 701	Posted - 2014.01.18 00:49:00 - [31] - Quote 1 and 2 is a yes, 3 and 4 is a definate no. Well, 200 meter lock range is fine, but no damage buff. "Hello, world!" lol, sounds like something a whore lover would say Alt of the great Godin I like chocolate ^___^
Asimov Deathbringer WarRavens League of Infamy 7	Posted - 2014.01.18 15:40:00 - [32] - Quote Swarms are basically useless in their current state. I haven't used them since the first few days of 1.7 to try out the "balancing". They are way way under powered. The lock on range needs to be no less than 250 meters. Speed needs to be increased by alot. Damage needs a buff as well. Speed wise it should be impossible for a ground vehicle to out run them and difficult for a ds to get away. For ground vehicles there are always ways to out smart a swarm. Just hide under or behind structures, landscape, or whatever is available. Same goes with a ds. Smart manuvering can and has always been a great defense against swarms. But in no way should they be cross utilised as anti-infantry. Thats what your sidearm and grenades are for. Btw I have proto swarms and was running it with 4 complex dmg mods at proficiency 2 and the most I could accomplish without several other swarm, and forge gunners was to back a HAV out of range. Even with backup its next to impossible to have any chance of winning once the opposition spams HAVs. Its not only swarms but all av is seriously out of wack forge guns excluded. http://WarRavens.enjin.com/home https://dust514.com/recruit/TYoArG/
Pamperin Witch WASTELAND JUNK REMOVAL Top Men. 2	Posted - 2014.01.18 16:14:00 - [33] - Quote ThePlayerkyle13 wrote: Ulysses Knapse wrote: #3: Anti-Infantry Usage Swarm Launchers are the most limited weapons in Dust 514. I propose they gain the ability to lock-on to infantry. However! This won't come easy. Locking on to infantry would take far longer than locking on to vehicles, and they wouldn't be able to fly directly at a dropsuit, only at its general direction (unless you were very lucky, you would only ever deal splash damage). I'm not sure of the exact numbers for how long it takes to lock or how accurate the missiles are, but you get the gist of it. Also, with #2, you would still have to lead your target to some extent for the best results. You could also reduce the splash damage, which wouldn't hurt its main purpose much but it would reduce its effectiveness when used in this manner. Instead of locking on to infantry what about switching the Launcher to Manual Fire wheres thiers no lock on, cos i'm pretty sure that killing Infantry with a lock on weapon ecpecially one thats designed for Anti-Vehciles uses would be annoying & unavoidable... Swarms used to fire without a lock but people cried a river and ccp changed it. Swarms used to track there target around the buildings but people cried again and ccp changed them so now they hit the building and mountains. Why swarms use heat signature instead of optical locks is a mystery in itself since we have those now in the 21st century. And as some has pointed out, why would a heat seeking missile first fly to the spot of the lock in the sky before going after there target ???? Missiles should start correcting there flight a few seconds after they are launched !!! Any old Eve player can tell you, BOB is icelandic for CCP
Pamperin Witch WASTELAND JUNK REMOVAL Top Men. 2	Posted - 2014.01.18 16:28:00 - [34] - Quote BAD FURRY wrote: How bout keep SL,s how they are and re add in a slower dum fire that can kill drop-suits like it uses to do only now not so OP HAY Look CCP i fixed SL,s ! I have asked for dumb fire missile since open beta started. Maybe they will break down and add it since we really need something else. Ask any old Eve player, BOB is icelandic for CCP


Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.